Dear Ottfried,
The CFP described Judaism as one of the "three most apocalyptic religions."
It is not at all apparent from the CFP that the conference was interested
in apocalyptic themes as they developed within Judaism. There certainly
were apocalyptic movements within Judaism, but none of them became the main
stream, as the CFP seems to suggest. From a scholarly perspective, a
presupposition is dangerous because it tends to be accepted without
argument, when it may actually turn out to be false. I suggest that the
wording of the CFP creates just such a presupposition which I believe is
demonstrably false. I confess to poor scholarship in my assumption as to
the cause.
My irritation stems from participation in the Medieval Studies Program at
the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK) and the Medieval and
Renaissance forum here at NYU. Unlike your list, which defines its area of
interest as European, the UTK and NYU programs purport to include the
medieval period generally. At the UTK Medieval Studies Program, only one
evening each semester was devoted to the Muslim world. My area of interest
is medieval Judaeo-Arabic philosophy. When I asked why more time was not
devoted to the area south and east of the Mediterranean, I was told there
was "no interest." [The topic for the program one semester was "Saints and
Sinners." The Professor of Islamic Studies was asked to speak on saints in
Islam without bothering to ask whether Islam had such a concept. (A sufi is
hardly comparable to a Roman Catholic saint.)]
In my limited experience, there seems to be a gulf between scholars of
European Medieval Studies and Islamic Medieval Studies that has persisted
even after the academy in the West had identified Eurocentrism as one of
its problems. [My attempts to involve the Near Eastern Studies Department
here at NYU in the medieval studies forum have not been successful,
either.] The problem goes far beyond parochial sensitivities, and I am very
sorry that I worded my original objection in a way that dragged the ensuing
discussion in that direction.
Laurie
At 01:16 05/02/97 DST, you wrote:
>Dear Laurence (if I may),
>
>I believe the point is that on this list we have always tried -- and I would
>say: most times we have also suceeded remarkably well -- not to express us
>and not to address us as members of a minority or majority, but as people
>with a common scholarly interest, because there are quite a number of
>different and potentially conflicting religions and religious (or non- or
>a-religious) attitudes assembled on this list. Since our common scholarly
>interest is in medieval religion(s), it is, of course, not always easy to
>deal with the matter in a way which does not get our actual religion and
>attitude involved. But in such cases the general idea is to express our
>views in an unoffensive way, and -- equally important: -- not to feel easily
>offended, but to give potentially offensive postings the benefit of some
>benevolent doubts. I for one very much appreciate your participation on this
>list, and I could imagine that your partial dissent with the phrasing of the
>CFP in question could lead to interesting discussions where nobody has to
>state that somebody glosses over things or that somebody else should
>ventilate his views on some other forum. With the help of our listowners
>George and Carolyn, medieval-religion has become a sort of home for many of
>us, and although we tease us a lot, we rarely beat us (those of us who
>nevertheless like a bit of static from time to time entertain additional
>subscriptions to other lists like for instance -- see me shiver -- AnSax-L).
>
>Yours,
>
> Otfried
Laurence F. "Laurie" Friedman, Ph.D., CHP
New York University
205 Third Avenue, Apt. 16A
New York, NY 10003-2526
(212) 387-7957
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|